Palo Duro Nursing Home
405 S Collins St, Claude, TX 79019 · Armstrong County · 66 certified beds · avg 32 residents/day · certified since Feb 19, 1986
Part of chain: GULF COAST LTC PARTNERS (20 facilities, chain avg rating 2.4★)
What health inspectors found (on-site government inspections — the most independent evidence available)
Health inspection rating: ★★★★☆4/5 · CMS overall rating: 3/5
The health inspection star above is graded on a curve within each state — a set share of each state's facilities gets each star level — so a facility can have few citations and still rate 2–3 stars if others in its state did even better. The overall rating combines that inspection score with staffing and self-reported quality measures.
All citations in the current public record (21)
CMS publishes roughly the last three inspection cycles plus recent complaint investigations. Older surveys drop out of the record as new ones are completed.
| Date | Severity | What the facility was cited for |
|---|---|---|
| Aug 20, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not provide activities that meet residents' needs and interests. Nursing homes must offer meaningful activity programs, not just leave residents idle. |
| Aug 20, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have a registered nurse on duty at least 8 hours a day, or did not have a registered nurse serving full-time as director of nursing. |
| Aug 20, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not treat residents with dignity and respect, or did not honor their rights to make their own decisions and communicate freely. This is one of the most fundamental resident rights. |
| Aug 20, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Aug 20, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not provide care that took into account residents' past trauma or their cultural backgrounds. Care is supposed to be sensitive to what residents have lived through and where they come from. |
| Aug 20, 2025 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility employed staff who were not licensed, certified, or registered as required by state law. |
| Jul 15, 2025 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop, carry out, or maintain an effective training program for all new and existing staff members. · from a complaint |
| Jul 30, 2024 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Jul 30, 2024 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not update each resident's care assessment at least once every 3 months. These regular check-ins keep the resident's care plan matched to their current condition. |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not coordinate resident assessments with the state's pre-admission screening program for mental illness and intellectual disabilities, or failed to refer residents for the special services they need. |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not protect residents' personal information or did not keep complete, accurate medical records that meet professional standards. |
| Jul 30, 2024 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
| Nov 20, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. · from a complaint |
| Jun 1, 2023 | F · Potential for harm, facility-wide | The facility did not get its food from approved, safe sources, or did not store, prepare, and serve food according to professional food safety standards. |
| Jun 1, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not honor residents' rights to request, refuse, or stop treatment, to decline participation in medical research, or to make an advance directive — a written statement of their wishes for future medical care. |
| Jun 1, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not properly complete the required screening (called PASARR) that identifies whether a person entering a nursing home has a mental illness or intellectual disability and needs specialized services. |
| Jun 1, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not develop or follow a complete care plan for each resident — the written roadmap covering all of a resident's needs, with measurable goals and timelines. |
| Jun 1, 2023 | E · Potential for harm, repeated | The facility did not have or follow an effective program to prevent and control infections — such as proper hand washing, cleaning, and isolation practices. This is the most commonly cited deficiency nationwide. |
| Jun 1, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not accurately assess a resident's health and needs. Assessments are the foundation for all the care a resident receives. |
| Jun 1, 2023 | D · Potential for harm, one-off | The facility did not keep the environment free of accident hazards, or did not provide enough supervision to prevent accidents like falls. |
Inspection trend by year
Citations from standard inspections stayed about the same across the last two inspection cycles (6 → 6).
| Year | Citations | Serious (G–L) | Worst severity that year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 8 | 0 | F |
| 2024 | 6 | 0 | F |
| 2025 | 7 | 0 | E |
Counts reflect the current CMS public record (~3 inspection cycles plus complaint investigations); years with no surveys show no row. Inspection frequency varies, so compare severity as well as counts.
Fines and enforcement (last 3 years)
No fines or payment denials in the published 3-year window.
Nurse staffing (from payroll records, adjusted for how much care residents need)
| Measure | This facility | Texas avg | U.S. avg | Where it stands |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total nurse staffing (hours per resident per day) | 3.12 | 3.46 | 3.95 | bottom 32% in Texas; bottom 18% in the U.S. |
| Registered Nurse hours | 0.43 | 0.44 | 0.69 | top 41% in Texas; bottom 26% in the U.S. |
| Weekend total nurse staffing | 2.86 | 3.04 | 3.50 | bottom 45% in Texas; bottom 24% in the U.S. |
| Weekend RN hours (not acuity-adjusted) | 0.36 | 0.34 | 0.48 | top 33% in Texas; bottom 43% in the U.S. |
| Total nursing staff turnover (%) | 39.1 | 55.3 | 45.8 | top 18% in Texas; top 34% in the U.S. |
| RN turnover (%) | 66.7 | 54.6 | 42.9 | bottom 34% in Texas; bottom 15% in the U.S. |
Hours are per resident per day, case-mix adjusted by CMS so facilities caring for sicker residents can be compared fairly (same basis as the CMS staffing star). "Top X%" means better than most facilities: more staffing hours, or lower turnover. Raw (unadjusted) reported hours: total 3.04, RN 0.41, weekend 2.79. Staffing rating: 1/5.
Self-reported quality measures
Note: these ratings are based on data the facility reports about itself to CMS. They are not independently verified by inspectors, and can look better than inspection findings. Give more weight to the inspection results above.
Quality measures rating: 3/5 · long-stay residents: 3/5 · short-stay residents: —/5
Who owns this facility
For profit - Corporation
| Owner / manager | Type | Role | Stake | Since |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claudetx LLC | Organization | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2025 |
| Claudetx LLC | Organization | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/21/2025 |
| Gleisner, Stoney | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Gleisner, Stoney | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2025 |
| Holcomb, Holly | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 05/29/2021 |
| Mistretta, Cassandra | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2025 |
| Pfeifer, Mary | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 04/01/2025 |
| Stewart, Randy | Individual | Operational/Managerial Control | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2010 |
| Stewart, Randy | Individual | ADP of the SNF | NOT APPLICABLE | 10/01/2010 |
| Stratton, Emilee | Individual | Corporate Officer | NOT APPLICABLE | 03/18/2018 |
Questions to ask on your visit
Generated from this facility's actual citation record — bring them to a tour and ask the administrator directly.
- "Can I see this month's activities calendar, and what do you offer residents who can't leave their rooms?"
- "How many hours a day is a registered nurse physically in the building, including weekends?"
- "Can you give me examples of how your staff protect residents' dignity in everyday care, like bathing and dressing?"
- "Who completes resident assessments here, and how do you check them for accuracy?"
- "How do you learn about each resident's background and history, and how does that shape their care?"
- "How do you verify licenses and certifications for every caregiver before they start, and how often do you recheck them?"
- "What training do new hires get before working with residents, and what ongoing training do all staff receive?"
- "What did your most recent kitchen inspection find, and can I see how food is stored and prepared?"
- "What is your current ratio of nursing staff to residents on day, evening, and weekend shifts?"
- "Can I see the results and plan of correction from your most recent state inspection?"
Nearby facilities (within 20 miles)
No other Medicare-certified nursing homes within 20 miles in the current records.
Facility data as of CMS processing date 2026-08-01. CCN 455641.